Rose, there is most certainly a definition of male rape in law.

The none consensual act of buggery upon a male persons act 1958 and the maximum term was life imprisoment

This was ammended as a statute as the rape of a male 1976

and was subsequently ammended as buggery and rape of a male person, the Criminal justice act 1994.


There is also on the statute books, the act of forced sodomy of a women, by definition ( the rape of a female person using sodomy) which also overides the theory that a penis and a vagina have to be involved.

There are also statutes, covering the rape, vaginally, and anally using an object against a non consenting person

Also offences under the crimes against the persons act, to include, people who are not mentally aware, retarded or in such a state as to not be aware of what is happening. all which include the rape of men or women

So whoever told you that there is no such legal definition or interpretation of male rape is talking out of their arse, lol

Also Butler - Criminal Justice and public order, gender- gender-rape law. ruled case law 10.1023/A:1009297603439
That the perpretation of rape was not soley related to gender, ( the interpretation of that is that women can rape men by the forced intoduction of an unwilling male to enter his penis into the vagina) (the same can be said of a male on male)
Also there is obviously the staututory rape of of a minor which is also none gender related women on boys, men on girls.

So its not necessarily the person with the willy that is the rapist. But in most cases women on boys is dealt with under the section of Gross indecency, Whereas a man on a young girl it is deemed rape.

Crissie Know it all, lol

(Thank Julie) lol

Nikki, hugs.

In 3 hours I will be leaving for my holidays. 24 days, so will miss the ongoing debates etc in the forums, bad time to be leaving with this debate going on, er should I cancel my holiday? yeah like hell, lol

My aunt is The chief accountant for a presdigous London firm of Barristers and law firm, a registered trustee at the high courts, mostly specialising in Litigation and corporate law. Whilst not specialising in criminal law, obviously we have access to limited information.

I take it on advisement, that a person raped with a GRC, would be charged with the offence under the crimes against the persons act under the butler review with sodomy. and this is covered by the 1994 act as ammended, an act of sodomy commited upon a non consensual person. And is conjusive to rape under the gender gender law previously mentioned.

Cannot imediately find a case that has set a precedent, but the act itself is quite, clear.

Cristine

This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at December 8, 2015 9:00 PM GMT

Paragraph 3 of my last post, insert, (the Rapist would be), insert between GRC would be charged, sounds as thought the victime would be charged lol.

The gender of the victim, ref the gender -gender revision by Butler, should not be indicative in any way to the severity or jugement of the crime, its a crime against the persons act. and emphasis on gender should not be made an issue either by the defence or the prosecution.

As to Rose, victim in court having their sexual history brought to account, the same goes for the rape or women or men, its standard. The butler reports states that Gender or sexual preference on its own should not be made a prefential consideration when evidence is being presented or judgements made.

Victim unless otherwise ruled are reffered in all instances by name, as a person, ergo if someone is a pre-op and have a GRC they would be reffered to as Jane Do,

Hope this clears this up.

Hurghaga is fantastic. Hotel is fabby, food is terrific and realy chilling out.


Loadsa love to you all.

xxxXCristineXxxx

This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at December 8, 2015 9:01 PM GMT

Rose xxXxx

In any civilised country there are laws against murder/homicide, regardless off gender, where homophobic rage would not be an excuse or mitigation, to the point so as to cause the defendant to escape justice altogether, it might be taken to account in the sentencing of the perpretrator.,

Now we enter the realms of deceit. ie. if any transexual presents themselves as a GG and upon entering into a sexual encounter, the defendat believing that one is a GF, only to discover that the person comes complete with male genitalia, then that while is not an excuse the rage and disgust that a male would feel, still does not excuse murder in law, The sentencing might reflect that.

This is why one should be open and honest before entering into a relationship of any kind, even if one is post op. Logically if it leads to rape and the defendant tries to plead homophobic rage and disgust then that is in itself a denial of the disgust and rage, anyone that disgusted would hardly go on to comit rape, Could envisage it leading to a severe beating even to the point of murder but rape, I don't think there would be any credence in that excuse..

When I get home, will delve into this further and see if there are cases of victims in court that have/have not had their gender exploited by the defence and what effects it had on verdicts and sentencing.

Loadsa Love Crisitne xxXxxx

This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at December 8, 2015 9:03 PM GMT

Herewith a list of current cases of juricprudence and ongoing revisions and forthcomeing changes to legal definitions. for those realy interested in doing some research for themselves, I'm on holiday, lol, so not gonna bother evaluating everything, suss it out for yourselves.

I do have the email address and personal contact for the person compiling  the changes, who is something of an expert on transgendered, law. if your interested.

Cristine

This post was edited by Cristine Jennifer Shye. BL at December 8, 2015 9:04 PM GMT

Stephenie.

The law is quite clear. If a woman touched you in an appropriate way, As I said if you read back, she would probably be charged with gross indecency, if she forced you to have penatrive sex, then that would come under rape, but generally, would be charged with gross indecency, if you were a minor at the time, that would have been taken into consideration when sentancing.
None penatrive sex would proably been deemed serious sexual assault of a minor. But the rape of minors has been on the statute books as far back as records, go Rape involves penatrive sex, either with a penis, or object, If you read back there are some of the dates and details of some of the most basic revisions to the rape of a male. Under the Butler revisions, the gender of the perpretrator of rape or the gender of the victim, is not indicative to gender. Both are legally culpable to an act of rape..

Through my contacts, I have been able to elicit masses of information, I have asked Katie if we could have a new forum, Titled the transgendered and the law, Where I will be able to quote, The rights of the transgendered and the law, citing case histories and the relevant laws, relating to Employment law, case histories for the advancment of transitioning, where treatment has been started under the UK NHS and then delayed or deffered, laws relating to the transgendered in police custody and prison.
Descrimination laws and peoples entitlements, for instance, once you have a GRC as far as I am aware at the moment if you have a GRC, you are entitled to draw a pension in line with genetic females, five years earlier than men,

I will be contacting Prof Andrew Sharp, by invitation, when I get back from my holidays with a view to asking him to comment, if the new forum is established.

I have on record of various case histories where Transgendered people have been under the care of the NHS been given hormone treatments and therapy and then denied suirgery, on reasons of budget or delayed referal for surgery and have won their cases in the high court,

I have also asked various legal establishments and publishers of legal interpretations of various acts for permission to re-publish them here in tranny web, on a basis of a none comercial gain, based on TW being a support and advice site.

Cristine

Further to my previous posts and in answer to Nikkis question about terms of reference, ref gender of a victim, I have recieved the following email from Proffessor Andrew Sharpe, We have a mutual aquaintance.


Dear Cristine.

Ref your email, GRA2004.

If anybody is penetrated annaly or vaginally with a penis, without their consent, the proper charge for the offence would be a
''Section 1 rape (SOA 2003)''. The legal gender, GRC or not does not matter. It is irrelevant under the two previous act ammendments and so far not to any subsequent ammendments.

If the victim does have a GRC then they would obviously be reffered to with and as a female, with the pronoun female.

Even if the victim does NOT have a GRC and is in the process of transitioning and presents as a female, It is usually accepted by the DPPS and the courts that out of respect for the victim, It is my considered opinion that would be taken into consideration and she would be reffered to as a female.

Best wishes Andrew.

Another guide to the treatment and detention of TG people is:-

It is quite lengthy and involved, but there are definitions and laid out requirements and procedures tables 1-5.


http://pfc.org.uk/node/384#sn1-2

Rose, xxXxx.

So much for the missive from your attendance group, refusing to acknowledged the fact of male rape. But from what I understand now, there is now now difference of rape by buggery, genderwise, its dealt with under an amendment that I failed to find earlier, section one of the Sexual offences act SO2003. Which precedes the Gender recognition act being passed by parliament in 2004.

the case you quoted from your local paper, ''The police were investigating *an alleged* rape of a young boy'' the police cannot specify that a named person did the rape until he has been found guilty by a court of law. Thats contrary to prejudicial reporting and could be used in argument for a defence on the grounds of a pre-biased jury. The usual response from police sources is a person has been detained and charged in connection with the offence. This is where the rape of women, where the womans identity is kept in closure, whilst the name of the arrested person is released. is rather unfair if it turns out that the rape allegations are found to be untrue, mud sticks?

In my previous post, the email from professor sharpe, I saved the mail to a folder then edited it to cut out a lot of references and links and examples, to simplify it, also removing various personal references, it was me that spelt Anally wrong, lol in my hurry to get to the pool.

Cristine xXx



As for court reporting, I'm not sure, but have been told there is an act of freedom to judgements, by way of public interest,

Further to satisfying the question of male type rape ie buggery of a pre-op transexual, there is also a very interesting case that Proffessor Sharpe has pointed out to me. just to show how slippery defence lawyers can get in trying to deride the seriousness of the rape of a post op transexual vaginally.

Regina versus John Mathews, Reading Crown court. T960397.

A jugmental precendent ( these overide statutes or clarify, misleading or ambiguous elements of statute law, passed by Parliment.)

Defence council arguing that the perpretrator of raping a post-op transexual vaginally, did not in effect comit rape, as the vagina was artificially constructed and therefore technically did not come under the clinical constitution or definition of a female vagina. The defendant had admitted that he had intercourse with the complainant against her will. , that case had been proved, but defending council demanded that a lesser charge of indecent assault be brought forward for judgement, instead of the more serious case of rape. as the complainant had not been raped anally, there was in effect no basis for the rape charge..


http://www.pfc.org.uk/node/322


Cristine

My last posting here, I thought was very interesting. The rape of a post op, and the ongoing technicalities and terms of reference, everyone was interested enought to comment on the rights and effects the judicial system had on pre-ops.
But this is even more interesting, showing just how far the law has come giving considerations to Transexuals.
Rose, any comments?

Cristine